|
|
Post by bblwi on Sept 19, 2015 17:17:14 GMT -6
If we would in a short period of time become very short of water desalting of ocean water would be taking place at a rapid pace. Sure it would be costly but we would be able to cover the cost and our economies and cultures would change based on those impacts. Right now alternative energies are just that alternatives and are thought of as just that. Over time when they become more commonplace and accepted we won't talk of them like we do now. When we become mature enough to separate energy sources from politically charged "climate Change" discussions we will make considerable progress. The huge cost of electricity is constructing, upgrading and maintaining the distribution systems we have. As technology changes and origination sites and costs become a lower percentage of the total cost then it is today, multiple sources may come into play and most may not be even prototyped today.
175 years ago we got our first steam boats, 30 years later steam engines and railroads, 30 years later, internal combustion engines and autos,/ less than 30 years later powered flight, 30 years later, jet engines, less than 20 years later rockets and on an on. As one can see about every generation we have made huge advances in mobility and technology that impacts the masses not a few, and I don't see that trend slowing down at all.
Bryce
|
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 19, 2015 18:53:31 GMT -6
Tman compairing thr investment of radios,TV's and calculators to billions into power substations and their max output? not apples to apples at all.
Well if you have one great the problem is many people,in the US don't want this reactors in their neighborhoods.
No hype just the cost and how it gets transferred onto the consumer with higher rates that is just fact. I am all for wind power would create more jobs as they all need to be serviced and blades replaced all the time, as long as the cost per KWH is compairbale to what we have or had in the past. Clean coal is an option one with less cost but some want to see coal done away with all together. There is no cheaper new construction than a coal power plant. Wind is comming down in price as long as the bird people don't try to outlaw it next LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Sept 20, 2015 6:30:53 GMT -6
how can you say, with a st face, that new technology isn't new technology?
sometimes the points you choose to debate, leave me baffled.
the point, to elaborate it further- is that ALL new technology is very expensive when it first comes out, and if successful, the price drops substantially due to efficiency, volume and competition.
the difference in views is you want to do nothing, and I want to investigate the uses. also, you do understand- oil and coal are getting billions from both state and the federal govt?
BILLIONS
good points Bryce.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappincoyotes39 on Sept 20, 2015 7:29:47 GMT -6
Tman you miss my point new technology is just as you state it,meet BIG difference in a new computer, TV etc and the NEED for energy for all to live their daily lives!
Many people,get Assitance for such in the terms of millions if not billions as well.
Succesful? What does that mean in this case? Solar power making far less energy at a higher cost? Smilar has been around for many,many years and yes new technology with it in California they have paint that has material in it to make energy, IF you have the money to buy such and IF you have the money to invest into the cells to store such and IF you have the money to convert it from DC to AC.
I liken some of this talk with E 85 fuel , man how great for the environment until we really break down the cost to produce such and then find out the govt was subsidizing it. LOL. Turned out not to be what they thought it would be. Now who is buying such? 3 miles down the road we have a co op still selling it why I do not know. gas is 2.15 and E 85 is 2.03 meaning it will cost you more to burn E 85 in your vehicle with the 15-30 percent loss in MPG. Yep that newer technology sure was something. Wonder how many car makers still making E 85 compatible engines? corn prices have done nothing but drop since the subsidy for e 85 was taken away.
3.60 corn and land prices around 10,000 per acre will not compute for too many more years!
My point is we know what has worked for many,many years and yes some new things might prove out to be a benefit for not only the environment but to keep energy prices more stable, doesn't make them all so.
|
|
|
|
Post by trappnman on Sept 20, 2015 9:57:33 GMT -6
BILLIONS AND BILLIONS SPENT TO KEEP YOUR COAL AND OIL BURNERS
if you don't understand the progression of cost vs success/numbers in tech then you don't
I'm just glad your view is the minority
|
|
|
|
Post by bblwi on Sept 20, 2015 12:27:00 GMT -6
Many choose to consume higher cost sources of commodities, food, clothing whatever. Those that choose organic foods pay 50-200% more for the same calories by choice. We see this in those that spend an extra 3-10K for a hybrid auto as well. We can talk about the masses and what forms they use and with the vast majority of our citizens in a earning treadmill at best and many losing ground they will have to utilize what the few that control the commodities and utilities offer as they won't have the income to move on the alternative choices. That may well be some of the real reasons that a few are working hard to maintain wage stagnation as lower income families have far fewer choices that can be made due to economic shortfalls. Governments can and do work to stimulate options. We can see that in our political debates now. Not much conversation at all about exploring the future of where commodities will come from and if and should there be government impact on routes to take.
Bryce
|
|
